That would still be drag racing, correct? See, I agree with you. Despite claims by some that drag racing is passé and road racing is king, reality is that most people buying Mustangs, Camaros and Challengers hardly ever see a track of any kind.

That's true but when gm's so focused on handling and track cars its all the owners had to hold on to. Weight is what killed the 5th and no suspension was gonna over come that on the strip so they decided to conquer it on the track. Now had a 5th gen ever come with an ls3 and an auto things would have been slightly different. Now with the lt1 and 8sp auto it should have no problem running hard on both tracks. And if it "god for bid" comes in weighing less than a mustang those guys will having nothing to cry about but looks.(subjective) I'm sure much like the camao guys did(1le/zl1) they ford faithfully are gonna swing real hard on the gt350 even though all they care about is drag racing.

Over on M6G there's a former Stingray owner who said the LT1 kind of crap out past 5,600? Like it falls on its face.

Can anyone comment on that?

That's good old Brent302. He talks smack about the cars he doesn't own. He talked a lot of crap about the Chevy cars. Got a Stingray.. Then he defended the Stingray left and right and talked about how it's better than the Mustang. Crashed his Vette (Sold after being fixed). Now he has a Mustang again and is back to trash talking the Chevy motors.. LOL

This thread reminds me of the love and hate between the C6 and C7, in the end it turned out the C7 was clearly the better car and nearly everybody loves it. I think the new Camaro will end up being the same way. I had a C6 and bought a C7 and I love it, also had a 2010 Camaro 2SS RS, sold it along with my C6 to buy my C7. Now I'm thinking of trading my wife's 2012 LaCrosse and getting her a 2016 Camaro SS.

This thread reminds me of the love and hate between the C6 and C7, in the end it turned out the C7 was clearly the better car and nearly everybody loves it. I think the new Camaro will end up being the same way. I had a C6 and bought a C7 and I love it, also had a 2010 Camaro 2SS RS, sold it along with my C6 to buy my C7. Now I'm thinking of trading my wife's 2012 LaCrosse and getting her a 2016 Camaro SS.

Aesthetic preference aside, anybody who does not believe the Gen6 Camaro is not a better car than the 5thGen is simply in denial. Same holds true for the Mustang. Both GM and Ford are giving us phenomenal pony cars to buy and drive. Whichever one you opt for, you're getting a hell of a car for the price.

Ford might give the mustang a HP bump but with that ticking time bomb transmission the mt-82 ford can't bump it up to much. I just think it's funny how nervous the mustang fan boi's are. Its like 1999 all over again. Ls1 Camaro's killing 16 and 32 valve 4.6's. I don't care how much high rpm HP the 5.0 makes, I want low rpm torque from a high cube low tech Chevy small block.

T
What I don't get is how people are saying that Dodge has the Hellcat. Well yeah but how much is the Hellcat and can the average person afford it? Most likely no. So REALISTICALLY SPEAKING the only people who can afford a Hellcat are people making an income of over 100k unless they have NO OTHER BILLS which here in California I'm being billed for everything I do including breathing the air.
NUTS!

SO TRUE!

The Hellcat is most definitely out of my price range. It cannot be compared to the SS Camaro, btw, i'm in CA too, and felt the pain this weekend when i filled up the tank.

To be perfectly honest, if the styling on the rear bumper is the only thing they're laughing it (which they are, TBH), then it means Chevy did right on the mechanicals.

saw one of these driving down the road and was like AHA cuz im pretty sure this is why they were trying to incorporate that little flare? at the back, anyways yeah Charger, Sure, if its a Hellcat. Challenger, Sure if its a Hellcat. and as far as mustang goes EWE, UNLESS its a shelby i do not like this year of regular/GT models unlike the previous Gen. the outside was overhauled leaving this inside with ALOT of dissapointment for me, i sat in one at our auto show and was very let down.... shifter is awkward in the Dodges for automatic, dont like the new lower trims front grille for the charger and nothing to complain about with the challenger cuz the taillights grew on me as soon as i saw them in person. Camaro does have issues, but the interior is WAY better looking TO ME than the plain looking dash of the stang....would buy the previous gen before this current one for interior as well, this camaro has so much more tech in comparison to previous models on the SS which is a win for camaro against the mustang from what i saw, no not a major outside overhaul like we expected but i was hoping for better inside and thats what i got lol.

Everyone has their own opinion at the end of the day though.
ill be saving for 2017 50th edition and see what minor improvements are made.

You have got to be kidding me, . When motor trend dyno tested the 14 Stingray it barely had over 400-rwhp no way that is going to hit 120-mph unless this new Camaro comes in at 3200-lbs. Remember most bolt on LS3 cars are well over 400-rwhp and struggle to hit 113-114 mph. The new ScatPacks are all 430+rwhp and event higher torque ratings. So is Dodge under-rating or is Chevy over rating?

Your right that the 6th gen doesn't even have a snow balls chance in hell at getting 120mph trap speeds stock but I think your going to be wrong in thinking the Scat Pak will be faster. I bet the car will ultimately hit a 11.7 or 11.8 bone stock in great air on a great track like Atco. I think mag times will be in the low-mid 12's and head to head will have the SS at least a tenth faster auto vs auto or manual vs manual. This is of course if the weight holds true and it doesn't have more torque management than the Vette. Everything else is known so its pretty easy to predict. No engine is underrated or overrated anymore unless its not SAE certified. Trying to compare engine output from chassis dyno results of two completely different cars with completely different drivetrains with different drivetrain losses on different days and different dynos is not in any way accurate. Also last time I checked there was a 30 crank HP difference between the 392 and the LT1 that should be multiplied even further with drivetrains losses so 400RWHP for the LT1 and 430RWHP for the 392 seems perfectly right to me

Lol have you seen your interior? The dash is 99% plastic and dead space. I'm not trying to rag on your interior, but obviously you are missing something when almost every person has said "wow" to the interior and agrees it's leaps and bounds better then the 5th gen interior. What's wrong with the steering wheel? You prefer the Cruz steering wheel that the Camaro is currently sporting?

Damn, I wish I was sitting next to nikeair at the reveal last Saturday...

Your right that the 6th gen doesn't even have a snow balls chance in hell at getting 120mph trap speeds stock but I think your going to be wrong in thinking the Scat Pak will be faster. I bet the car will ultimately hit a 11.7 or 11.8 bone stock in great air on a great track like Atco. I think mag times will be in the low-mid 12's and head to head will have the SS at least a tenth faster auto vs auto or manual vs manual. This is of course if the weight holds true and it doesn't have more torque management than the Vette. Everything else is known so its pretty easy to predict. No engine is underrated or overrated anymore unless its not SAE certified. Trying to compare engine output from chassis dyno results of two completely different cars with completely different drivetrains with different drivetrain losses on different days and different dynos is not in any way accurate. Also last time I checked there was a 30 crank HP difference between the 392 and the LT1 that should be multiplied even further with drivetrains losses so 400RWHP for the LT1 and 430RWHP for the 392 seems perfectly right to me

425-435 is about what stock 392's are making thru the new A8. A CAI and resonator delete yields about 455 whp and 445-455 tq.